GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Mir Alfaz Ali, S. Hukato Swu, JJ.
Nazir Hussain Laskar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 2015
Decided On : 27-02-2020
Penal Code – Sections 302, 201 – Code of Criminal Procedure – Section 161 – Murder – Order of Conviction – Appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Silchar, Cachar, in Sessions Case – By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302/201 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation under Section 302 IPC – Appellant was further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation under Section 201 IPC – Held, Findings of the learned trial court that financial obligation of the appellant to the deceased established by the documents seized vide Ext. 16 and mentioned in the circumstances No. 10 and 11, could be a motive behind the offence also cannot be brushed aside – Though, these two circumstances taken in isolation may not appear to be incriminating, they assume great significance when considered in a chain together with other circumstances and clearly point to the motive of the crime – Court is of the considered opinion that the chain of events was completed and as such, Court find no reason to defer with the conclusion arrived at by the learned trial court for recording conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and awarding sentence – Appeal Dismissed.
JUDGMENT
M.A. Ali, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.11.2014, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Silchar, Cachar, in Sessions Case No. 102/2013. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302/201 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation under Section 302 IPC. The appellant was further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation under Section 201 IPC.
2. Deceased Jayanta Saha was the victim of a ghastly homicidal killing in this case.
3. On 09.03.2013, a missing entry was filed by the father of the victim (PW-2) stating that his son Jayanta Saha (victim) after having gone out of the house with his motorcycle did not return home. During next two days after lodging the missing entry on 10.03.2013, mutilated human body parts wrapped in polythene sheets were found in different parts of the city. Upon recovery of the human body parts and articles like finger ring, bracelet etc., parents and family members of the deceased Jayanta Saha identified the body to be of the victim, Jayanta Saha and thereafter the formal FIR (Ext.8) was lodged on 12.03.2013, on the basis of which, police registered Silchar P.S. Case No. 479/2013 under Section 365/392/302/201/341 IPC. Inquest on the body parts were done by the Executive Magistrate. The police also seized some documents from the house of the deceased, which pointed to the financial dealings between accused and the deceased and thereafter following such clue arrested the accused on 12.03.2013. During interrogation, the accused made a disclosure statement regarding concealment of weapons of the offence and other articles of the deceased in his rented house and pursuant to such disclosure statement, police recovered the alleged weapon of offence and other articles from the rented house of the accused and sent some of the articles including alleged weapon of offence for chemical examination. The motorcycle used by the victim was also recovered from the house of the sister of the accused on being led by him.
4. The postmortem examination of the body was conducted by PW-1 Dr. Gunajit Das. The autopsy doctor stated, that he carried out the postmortem examination on 12 human body parts, which were identified to be of the victim, Jayanta Saha , male, aged about 32 years. The doctor opined that all the 12 body parts were identical in their complexion, contour, built, morphological structure, status of righor mortis and direction of hairs and anatomical alignment. There was also conglomeration of upper and lower aspect body parts in both the two lots of body parts and the detailed postmortem report of each part of the body is as under:
wxyz
"Part-I:- Under PMR No. 131/13 consisted of the left thigh being separated by postmortem incised injuries, at the grain and knee-joint exposing the cut ends of Femur both proximately and distally. Complexion of the part is swarthy, built average, shape cylindrical and male type. Rigor morits passed off completely with early decomposition changes in the tissues. Ends of bone found completely developed with no epiphyseal parts. Length of the part found to be 38 cms.
zyxw
wxyz
Part-2:- Under PMR No. 132/13 consisted of right thigh of length 38 cm being separated by postmortem incised injury at grain and knee joint exposing the cut ends of femur both proximally and distally. Complexion swarthy, built average, shape cylindrical and male type. Rigor morits passed off completely with early decomposition changes of the tissues, bones completely developed.
zyxw
wxyz
Part-3:- Under PMR NO. 133/13 consisted of the right arm being separated from the rest parts of the body by postmortem incised injuries at the shoulder and elbow joint. Complexion swarthy, rigor morits passed off, built average and male type. Tissues show early decomposition changes.
zyxw
wxyz
Part-4:- Under PMR No. 134/13 consiste
Earabhadrappa @ Krishnappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Himachal Pradesh Vs. Jeet Singh
Jaffar Hussain Dastagir Vs. State of Maharashtra
K.Chinnaswamy Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Mohammad Inayatulla Vs. The State of Maharastra
Rajiv Phukan Vs. State of Assam
Shamshul Kanwar Vs. State of U.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.